set_cbat_alert_percent

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It discloses type (UINT8), range (0–100), and default (10), which adds value beyond the schema. However, it does not state whether the change takes effect immediately, requires a reboot, or persists across power cycles. This is a moderate gap for a configuration setter.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence followed by a concise parenthetical with type, range, and default. Every word adds value, no redundancy. Fully front-loaded with the purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple single-parameter setter, the description covers purpose, meaning, constraints, and default. However, it omits behavioral details like persistence (save to flash?) and does not mention related tools (e.g., set_use_cbat_alerts). These gaps reduce completeness in a flight controller context where such details matter.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema describes the parameter simply as 'Value for cbat_alert_percent (UINT8, 0–100)'. The description adds meaningful context: 'Remaining capacity percentage to trigger a battery alert' and the default value of 10, which is not in the schema. This significantly enhances understanding.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states the tool sets the cbat_alert_percent parameter and explains it as 'Remaining capacity percentage to trigger a battery alert'. This verb+resource pairing is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_use_cbat_alerts (which enables the feature) and set_vbat_* (voltage thresholds).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. For example, it does not mention that set_use_cbat_alerts must be enabled for this setting to take effect. The description is purely descriptive without usage context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.